Email to Ross Sawyer
Hi Ross,
Thank you for allowing me to take a few moments to share with you in regard to the passage in Acts discussed today.
In all transparency, I was initially raised in a Catholic church and had no concept of having a relationship with Jesus. As a young girl, however, I was introduced to Christ when I accepted an invitation to attend a small charismatic church. It was here that I was told that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was a separate experience independent of receiving Christ (just as you referred to today). As I grew in my faith and grew in my understanding of Scriptures, I found that the Bible didn’t line up with that doctrine and I came to understand – as you taught today – that we receive the Holy Spirit when we receive Christ. I tried to steer clear from charismatic or traditional churches and ended up attending a small community church that didn’t teach much on the Holy Spirit and when it was taught it felt very academic and void of any really experience. So with little direction, I have prayerfully studied the Scriptures much on my own and have asked for guidance through the Holy Spirit and believe that He does guide us into all truth.
So here’s what I’ve come to understand ~
In reply to the question “What must we do?”; Peter said in Acts 2:38 “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Paul also affirms in Ephesians 1:13-14 that you receive the Holy Spirit when you believe in Christ and in Romans 8:9 that if you do not have the Spirit of Christ, you do not belong to Christ. So essentially…you can’t separate Jesus and the Holy Spirit which is why you see other verses interchangeably speak of Jesus living inside us and the Holy Spirit living inside us.
I’ve also come to understand that when the Bible speaks of being “Baptized in the Spirit” that this is about being wholly identified with something new and not a separate event. But I’ve been curious about the word “receive”.
According to Biblehub the Greek word is: 2983 lambánō (from the primitive root, lab-, meaning "actively lay hold of to take or receive," see NAS dictionary) – properly, to lay hold by aggressively (actively) accepting what is available (offered). 2983 /lambánō ("accept with initiative") emphasizes the volition (assertiveness) of the receiver.
So now considering Acts 8
It makes total sense that the Holy Spirit would be experienced differently by the Samaritans. The Scripture is clear – the Samaritans were baptized but had not yet received the Holy Spirit. [As you indicated in todays service, I’ve also heard this scripture used to promote the doctrine of the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” as a separate experience. ] But is it possible that they did not receive, as in “actively take hold of “ the Holy Spirit, because Philip was hesitant to explain the Holy Spirit? Vs 15 -16 indicates that Peter and John prayed that they would receive the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit had “not yet fallen” upon any of them. The Greek word for fallen is epipiptó which is commonly translated as “fall or press upon”. But further study also indicates that this can mean “to embrace or take possession of”. Could it be that the Samaritans had not received the Holy Spirit because the Spirit had not yet been embraced because the Samaritans had not yet taken possession of what they had already been given?
These are just some thoughts that I have considered when studying these passages. In studying all of Acts, it is clear that the Holy Spirit will move as He determines and taking any particular passage and declaring it normative to support a doctrine means to exclude other passages. Consider Acts 10:44-48, the Holy Spirit came on Cornelius and his household BEFORE Peter could make the altar call and they were baptized after the fact.
Thanks for considering this and taking time to share my thoughts. I want to be careful not to read anything more in Scripture that wasn’t revealed. So perhaps the Samaritans were baptized in Christ and received the Holy Spirit later (again…not normative). But if I understand that God is three in One, how is it possible to separate the Holy Spirit from receiving Christ? I’m also intrigued by this idea of receiving the Holy Spirit as “actively taking hold” of what has already been given. It would also explain why many believers today limit the Holy Spirit and attempt to live in their own strength. They have Christ – no doubt – but they have not “received” what has already been given to them.
Again…just some thoughts from an “ordinary unschooled” woman who loves to sit at the feet of Jesus.
I love being a part of 121!
Jamie
Hi Ross,
Thank you for allowing me to take a few moments to share with you in regard to the passage in Acts discussed today.
In all transparency, I was initially raised in a Catholic church and had no concept of having a relationship with Jesus. As a young girl, however, I was introduced to Christ when I accepted an invitation to attend a small charismatic church. It was here that I was told that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was a separate experience independent of receiving Christ (just as you referred to today). As I grew in my faith and grew in my understanding of Scriptures, I found that the Bible didn’t line up with that doctrine and I came to understand – as you taught today – that we receive the Holy Spirit when we receive Christ. I tried to steer clear from charismatic or traditional churches and ended up attending a small community church that didn’t teach much on the Holy Spirit and when it was taught it felt very academic and void of any really experience. So with little direction, I have prayerfully studied the Scriptures much on my own and have asked for guidance through the Holy Spirit and believe that He does guide us into all truth.
So here’s what I’ve come to understand ~
In reply to the question “What must we do?”; Peter said in Acts 2:38 “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Paul also affirms in Ephesians 1:13-14 that you receive the Holy Spirit when you believe in Christ and in Romans 8:9 that if you do not have the Spirit of Christ, you do not belong to Christ. So essentially…you can’t separate Jesus and the Holy Spirit which is why you see other verses interchangeably speak of Jesus living inside us and the Holy Spirit living inside us.
I’ve also come to understand that when the Bible speaks of being “Baptized in the Spirit” that this is about being wholly identified with something new and not a separate event. But I’ve been curious about the word “receive”.
According to Biblehub the Greek word is: 2983 lambánō (from the primitive root, lab-, meaning "actively lay hold of to take or receive," see NAS dictionary) – properly, to lay hold by aggressively (actively) accepting what is available (offered). 2983 /lambánō ("accept with initiative") emphasizes the volition (assertiveness) of the receiver.
So now considering Acts 8
- Vs 5: Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Christ to them.
- Vs 12: But when they believed Philip as he preached the gospel of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
- Vs 14-17: When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. 15On their arrival, they prayed for them to receive the Holy Spirit. 16For the Holy Spirit had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. 17Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
It makes total sense that the Holy Spirit would be experienced differently by the Samaritans. The Scripture is clear – the Samaritans were baptized but had not yet received the Holy Spirit. [As you indicated in todays service, I’ve also heard this scripture used to promote the doctrine of the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” as a separate experience. ] But is it possible that they did not receive, as in “actively take hold of “ the Holy Spirit, because Philip was hesitant to explain the Holy Spirit? Vs 15 -16 indicates that Peter and John prayed that they would receive the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit had “not yet fallen” upon any of them. The Greek word for fallen is epipiptó which is commonly translated as “fall or press upon”. But further study also indicates that this can mean “to embrace or take possession of”. Could it be that the Samaritans had not received the Holy Spirit because the Spirit had not yet been embraced because the Samaritans had not yet taken possession of what they had already been given?
These are just some thoughts that I have considered when studying these passages. In studying all of Acts, it is clear that the Holy Spirit will move as He determines and taking any particular passage and declaring it normative to support a doctrine means to exclude other passages. Consider Acts 10:44-48, the Holy Spirit came on Cornelius and his household BEFORE Peter could make the altar call and they were baptized after the fact.
Thanks for considering this and taking time to share my thoughts. I want to be careful not to read anything more in Scripture that wasn’t revealed. So perhaps the Samaritans were baptized in Christ and received the Holy Spirit later (again…not normative). But if I understand that God is three in One, how is it possible to separate the Holy Spirit from receiving Christ? I’m also intrigued by this idea of receiving the Holy Spirit as “actively taking hold” of what has already been given. It would also explain why many believers today limit the Holy Spirit and attempt to live in their own strength. They have Christ – no doubt – but they have not “received” what has already been given to them.
Again…just some thoughts from an “ordinary unschooled” woman who loves to sit at the feet of Jesus.
I love being a part of 121!
Jamie